Rolling Stone hits new low with cover

To say I was shocked to see the surviving alleged Boston marathon bomber portrayed as a rock star on the cover of "Rolling Stone" magazine is an understatement. It's hard to fathom that even a conference room full of far-left liberal 1960s want-to-be hippies would even think this was remotely a hip idea.

I wonder if they will come to realize this brainstorm is about as clever as streaking was at major sporting events in the 1970s.

By either trying to connect with the youth of today, knowingly for the sake of selling subscriptions/ad space, or inadvertently going to press with this travesty because they are a gaggle of bleeding heart liberals who thought this was a profound way of dealing with this current event in a cool way. We have just witnessed the bar being lowered another notch to a new all-time low.

If anyone working for Rolling Stone had taken a basic statistics course, it may have dawned on them that this could just inspire others to try and top Dzhokhar Tsarnaev in order to be featured front and center on next month's edition.

It's obvious to me that this was an attempt to regain its former glory as a medium to present radical, thought-provoking, alternative and revolutionary perspectives on people and events that made Rolling Stone unique in its day.